THIS FILING SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
JOHN AND LINDA MARACIC, )
)
C om pl ai n an t, )
)
v. ) PCB No. 05-212
) (Enforcement – Noise)
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA )
I N C . ,
)
)
Respondent. )
NOTICE OF FILING
TO: Ms. Dorothy M. Gunn Bradley P. Halloran, Esq.
Clerk of the Board Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street 100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500 Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL)
(VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL)
(PERSONS ON ATTACHED SERVICE LIST)
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of the
Illinois Pollution Control Board an
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF EDWARD W.
DWYER, ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF THOMAS G. SAFLEY, and
RESPONDENT’S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO
COMPLAINANTS’ COMPLAINT,
copies of which are herewith served upon you.
Respectfully submitted,
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH
AMERICA INC.,
Respondent,
By:/s/ Edward W. Dwyer
Dated: August 5, 2005
One of Its Attorneys
Edward W. Dwyer
Thomas G. Safley
HODGE DWYER ZEMAN
3150 Roland Avenue
Post Office Box 5776
Springfield, Illinois 62705-5776
(217) 523-4900
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 5, 2005
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Edward W. Dwyer, the undersigned, hereby certify that I have served the
attached ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF EDWARD W. DWYER, ENTRY OF
APPEARANCE OF THOMAS G. SAFLEY, and RESPONDENT’S ANSWER AND
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO COMPLAINANTS’ COMPLAINT upon:
Ms. Dorothy M. Gunn
Clerk of the Board
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
via electronic mail on August 5, 2005; and upon:
Bradley P. Halloran, Esq.
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Mr. John Maracic
Ms. Linda Maracic
6850 South Ridgeland Avenue
Monee, Illinois 60449
by depositing said documents in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, in Springfield,
Illinois on August 5, 2005.
/s/ Edward W. Dwyer
Edward W. Dwyer
TNTL:002/Fil/NOF-COS – Answer – Maracic
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 5, 2005
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
JOHN AND LINDA MARACIC, )
)
C om pl ai n an t, )
)
v. ) PCB No. 05-212
) (Enforcement – Noise)
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA )
I N C . ,
)
)
Respondent. )
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF EDWARD W. DWYER
NOW COMES Edward W. Dwyer, of the law firm of HODGE DWYER
ZEMAN, and hereby enters his appearance on behalf of Respondent, TNT LOGISTICS
NORTH AMERICA INC.
Respectfully submitted,
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH
AMERICA INC.,
Respondent,
By:/s/ Edward W. Dwyer
Edward W. Dwyer
Dated: August 5, 2005
Edward W. Dwyer
Thomas G. Safley
HODGE DWYER ZEMAN
3150 Roland Avenue
Post Office Box 5776
Springfield, Illinois 62705-5776
(217) 523-4900
TNTL:002/Fil/EOA-EWD-Maracic
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 5, 2005
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
JOHN AND LINDA MARACIC, )
)
C om pl ai n an t, )
)
v. ) PCB No. 05-212
) (Enforcement – Noise)
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA )
I N C . ,
)
)
Respondent. )
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE OF THOMAS G. SAFLEY
NOW COMES Thomas G. Safley, o f the law firm of HODGE DWYER ZEMAN,
and hereby enters his appearance on behalf of Respondent, TNT LOGISTICS NORTH
AMERICA INC.
Respectfully submitted,
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH
AMERICA INC.,
Respondent,
By:/s/ Thomas G. Safley
Thomas G. Safley
Dated: August 5, 2005
Thomas G. Safley
HODGE DWYER ZEMAN
3150 Roland Avenue
Post Office Box 5776
Springfield, Illinois 62705-5776
(217) 523-4900
TNTL:002/Fil/EOA-TGS-Maracic
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 5, 2005
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
JOHN MARACIC AND )
LINDA MARACIC, )
)
C om pl ai n an ts , )
)
v. ) PCB No. 05-212
) (Enforcement – Noise)
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA )
I N C . ,
)
)
Respondent. )
RESPONDENT’S ANSWER AND
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO COMPLAINANTS’ COMPLAINT
NOW COMES Respondent TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC.
(“TNT”), by its attorneys HODGE DWYER ZEMAN, and for its Answer and
Affirmative Defense to Complainants’ Complaint, states as follows:
ANSWER
1. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny the allegations
contained in paragraph one of Complainants’ Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
2. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny the allegations
contained in paragraph two of Complainants’ Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
3. TNT admits that it operates a facility at the address and telephone number
identified by Complainants in paragraph 3 of Complainants’ Complaint (“Facility”). To
the extent that paragraph t hree of Co mplainants’ C omplaint contains a ny further factual
allegations, TNT denies the same.
4. In response to paragraph four of Complainants’ Complaint, TNT admits
that its Facility conducts warehousing and distribution activities. To the extent that
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 5, 2005
2
paragraph four of Complainants ’ Complaint conta ins any further factual allegat ions, TNT
denies the same.
5. Paragraph five of Complainants’ Complaint states a legal conclusio n that
does not call for a response. To the extent that paragraph five of Complainants’
Complaint contains any factual allegations, TNT denies the same. TNT further
specifically denies that it has vio lated the numeric no ise limitations referenced in
paragraph five of Complainants’ Complaint.
6. TNT denies that any alleged activities referenced in paragraph six of
Complainants’ Co mplaint const itut e “pollut ion” or have resulted in t he vio lat ion o f any
of the numeric no ise limitations referenced in paragraph five of Co mplainants’
Complaint. To the extent that paragraph six of Complainants’ Complaint contains any
further factual allegations, TNT denies the same.
7. TNT denies the first and second sentences of paragraph seven of
Complainants’ Co mplaint. TNT has insufficient infor mat ion t o admit or deny the
allegations contained in the third sentence of paragraph seven of Complainants’
Complaint, and therefore denies the same. To the extent that paragraph seven of
Complainants’ Co mplaint contains any further factual allegations, TNT denies the same.
8. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny the allegations
contained in paragraph eight of Complainants’ Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
9. TNT denies that Complainants are entit led to the relief they request in
paragraph 9 of Complainants’ Complaint. To the extent that paragraph nine of
Complainants’ Co mplaint conta ins any factual allegations, TNT denies the same.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 5, 2005
3
10. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny any allegations
contained in paragraph 10 of Complainants’ Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
11. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny any allegations
contained in paragraph 11 of Complainants’ Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
12. TNT has insufficient information to admit or deny any allegations
contained in paragraph 12 of Complainants’ Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
WHEREFORE, Respondent TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC., by its
attorneys HODGE DWYER ZEMAN, prays that Complainants take nothing by way of
their Complaint, and that the Board award TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC.
all relief just and proper in the premises.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
For its affirmat ive defense to Complainants’ Co mplaint, TNT states as fo llows:
1. TNT’s operates the Facility in order to warehouse and distribute tires.
2. Trucks deliver trailers of tires to the Facility.
3. TNT does not own or operate these trucks.
4. Trucks also transport trailers of tires from the Facility.
5. TNT does not own or operate these trucks.
6. Complaints in part appear to allege that noise from these trucks, which
TNT does not own or operate, has, at Complainants’ property, violated the numeric noise
limitations cited by Co mplainants in paragraph five of t heir Complaint.
7. TNT has no evidence that this is the case.
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 5, 2005
4
8. However, if this is the case, such alleged violations relating to trucks
which TNT does not own or operate do not constitute violations of these numeric noise
limitations by TNT.
WHEREFORE, Respondent TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC., by its
attorneys HODGE DWYER ZEMAN, prays that the Board find in favor of TNT
LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC. on this Affirmative Defense, that Complainants
take nothing by way of their Complaint, and that the Board award TNT LOGISTICS
NORTH AMERICA INC. all relief just and proper in the premises.
Respectfully submitted,
TNT LOGISTICS NORTH AMERICA INC.,
Respondent,
By:/s/ Edward W. Dwyer
One of Its Attorneys
Dated: August 5, 2005
Edward W. Dwyer
Thomas G. Safley
HODGE DWYER ZEMAN
3150 Roland Avenue
Post Office Box 5776
Springfield, Illinois 62705-5776
(217) 523-4900
TNTL:002/Fil/Answer - Maracic
ELECTRONIC FILING, RECEIVED, CLERK'S OFFICE, AUGUST 5, 2005